Dracula - Now with Gargoyles!

Dracula is one of those properties that never loses relevance. Just off the top of my head, I can name four versions from just the past two to three years: Renfield, Nosferatu (Nicholas Hoult is a fan!), The Last Voyage of the Demeter, and Rade Jude’s AI Dracula (which I haven’t seen yet, but I’m definitely interested in). And now Luc Besson has bloodied the waters with his version.

Ignoring the allegations and general creepy shit (dating and eventually marrying a fifteen-year-old) about Besson, I’m still not the biggest fan of his work. The Fifth Element is the only film of his I truly enjoy. That written, when I see his name attached to something, I know it’s going to be at least a little interesting. That’s what makes his version of Dracula so disappointing.

This feels like a shallow remake of Francis Ford Coppola’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula more than a new adaptation of the source material. It starts in the 1400s with Vlad going off to war, then he renounces God when his beloved Elisabeta dies. Four centuries later, he looks crazy old and has a ridiculous wig. He comes across the reincarnated Elisabeta, and he attempts to reunite with her. 

There are a few differences, of course. This time, it’s set in Paris instead of London (though everyone speaks English). Instead of just being supernaturally charismatic, Dracula has to make a magical perfume to charm women. And instead of a harem of brides, he has…CGI gargoyles. The Paris aspect is fine, but the perfume and gargoyles are silly at best, and distractingly stupid at worst. 

This would be forgivable if the rest of the film was interesting. But I didn’t care about any of the characters, even with a cast that includes Christoph Waltz (just sleepwalking through yet another eccentric professional role). The violence is basic, and the film is oddly light on blood and sex, despite the R-rating. I suppose the costumes were interesting, but that’s certainly not enough to save anything. 

Caleb Landy Jones is a unique choice for Dracula. Oddly, though, I only found him interesting when he was in old-man make-up. He seems like a bit of a doofus when he’s young-looking. (He’s way too impressed with a puppet show at one point. You’re over four hundred years old; puppets shouldn’t evoke any reaction from you at all, man.) But as an old man, he’s engaging. Easily my favorite segment of the film is when he’s dropping exposition on Harker. It should be a weak point in the film, but it held my interest the most thanks to Jones’s performance. 

It’s almost as if the script was altered to make up for Jones’s lack of charisma. It would be too unbelievable that he could drive an entire nunnery wild, so they had to add in a magical perfume to explain it. 

Perhaps I’m being too negative on the film, but because it’s Dracula I’m going to be harsher. First off, I’m a huge fan, and I try to watch every adaptation that comes out, even if there’s one or two every year, it seems. Second, and more importantly, since this is a property that has been adapted so many times, any new take needs to justify its existence, and this doesn’t. There is no reason for this to exist aside from Besson just feeling like making Bram Stoker’s Dracula but in Paris with a weaker script and visuals. Oh, and gargoyles. 

The silly gargoyles will most likely be this film’s legacy. I’m not sure there is a good way to do it, but the CGI here is a bit weak. Beyond that, it just doesn’t make sense. So Dracula needs to spend years developing his Spanish fly perfume, but he’s able to make gargoyles come to life? (SPOILER alert: they’re revealed to be children at the end after his death, which is definitely horrifying but no less baffling.) Is it some kind of dumbass commentary on pleasing women or something? It’s easier to bring a gargoyle to life than it is to impress a woman. There are odd elements of humor (like Dracula’s ridiculous laugh when confronting Harker), but I can’t imagine the gargoyles are intended solely for comedy. And since it’s rated R, it’s not like they’re there to keep younger audience members entertained. The gargoyles clearly served only as a distraction to me. 

This film might have worked if Besson had taken Dracula’s life story told to Harker and just made that the movie. I would’ve taken an entire movie about him trying to kill himself, and then deciding to make the world’s most effective perfume over yet another re-tread. But this forgettable adaptation is what we got. Oh well, I’ll just check out the next adaptation that will probably come out in the next year or so.